I just had a brilliant idea! What if we could have LOTR sets? There could be Mt. Doom, Bara Dhur, Minas Tirith (the first level with the big hall raised up on a BURPfest), Helms Deep, Rivendell, and even the Shire! LEGO could even resurrect the Elephant piece from the old adventurer sets for the Oliphants and the Ninjas for the people that ride them! What do you think? They could even use it to introduce the elves, just as an edited afterthought.

Woe is me, woe is me, I used to have a hamster tree. Then it got eaten by a newt and now I have no cuddly fruit.

Although I agree, official LOTR would probably be fun, I don't like licensed Lego...If they followed suit with Star Wars and HP we would end up with a dozen fleshie Frodos and Gandalfs and maybe one exclusive and overpriced set with a figure in it that is unavailable elsewhere...But I do like the custom LOTR mocs that surface from time to time...I do not mean to sound pessimistic though, Lego has made some excellent sets lately, and I do hope that somehow we get more elephants, for the reason you mentioned...

Ah... I've seen "What if Lego makes Lotr" topics before Though I never posted on them, I'm gonna on this one.

Well, I see no use in it. Why should Lego make a licensed fantasy theme while it has its own fantasy? The new castle line is inspired by LOTR and it proved to be a success. So why trash that and bring a similar theme? You can build your own LOTR stuff with what Lego offers us if you really want to .

And also, an admin will surely move this topic to "Dear Lego" .
Anyways, take care .

And there you go. Here are some old threads:
what sort of castle theme...Lord of the Rings LegosWhat theme/genre...LEGO after Star WarsLord of the RingsSome questions...LOTR LegosI'm sure I said this sort of thing in one of those other threads, but I'd rather see LEGO make basic themes that give us great pieces that we can then use for MOCs. The current series and upcoming elves sets surely give a lot of Tolkien MOC fodder. TLG did explicitly rule out Lord of the Rings as "too violent" a few years back (and another company picked the "uilding set" license and put out some really bad clone sets). I suppose there is some opening for a Hobbit license with the upcoming movie as the book skews younger, but I see no real reason. Please see my site for my suspended* Tolkien project and a highly outdated link list to others' creations. Of those, surely Jon Furman sets the standard.

Bruce

*Yes, I know, someday I would like to get back to this project. Two moves, a new job, and a baby daughter have pretty much prevented me from tackling anything larger than a vig for a long time.

Yeah I had thought about buying a few but they were just so funny.... I could not understand why they had to be so simple.... With such a world they could have been awesome.

Funny LOTR is considered more violent than Indiana Jones with people stabbed, shot, melting and being evaporated or Star Wars with people being shot and lightsabered all over.... Seems they just like George Lucas. Seems like a nice guy so maybe rightly so. Just seems like a poor excuse but I am not bothered one way or the other.

Heir of Black Falcon wrote:Funny LOTR is considered more violent than Indiana Jones with people stabbed, shot, melting and being evaporated or Star Wars with people being shot and lightsabered all over.... Seems they just like George Lucas. Seems like a nice guy so maybe rightly so. Just seems like a poor excuse but I am not bothered one way or the other.

R

Well keep in mind that the decision to turn down LOTR was made at least eight years ago when Lego had much higher and tighter standards on things like violence, content, etc. The idea of an Indiana Jones line (presumably) hadn't been thought of, even. Yes, I know the Star Wars line was already out before LOTR was released, but remember that it's all lasers and lightsabers in Star Wars - not really realistic violence - and there's no real 'gore' (which LOTR had a lot more of).

A license for The Hobbit might happen, but I doubt it, unless either the Star Wars or Indiana Jones or Castle lines die before it's released in 2010 or whenever.

I appreciate your desire for LOTR Lego, but I think TLC is giving us the best of both worlds with the current castle line up. No liscensed theme and alot of room for expanding our castle fantasy MOCs. It essentially eliminated the arguments of this piece not looking right and that piece not matching the movie correctly. I was irritated that a clone brand got the rights first, but now am happy with what we are getting instead. Just think, in the near future TLC may restart the Pirates theme without having to go with the Pirates of the Carribean liscense. Then they won't have to kick themselves in the groin for not getting those highly popular themes. Instead, they can kick themselves in the crotch for messing up their hockey theme.

Chief Smithy of Brick ForgeI buy LEGO, I play with LEGO, therefore LEGO are not for children, they are for me!

I wasn't doubting you. What I'm trying to say with my clumsy english is that it's a weak argument from LEGO. If they wanted the LOTR license they could've done the sets. I don't think this is the only reason, or even a major reason, they decided not to go with LOTR.

And I'm glad they didn't. The Castle line has a lot more potential than LOTR would ever have.

Bruce: You did those cool re-inacments of LOTR? I have been readin those since I was 14!!!

Anyway: I love LOTR, and I really love the new Castle Line, I say that we don't have a LOTR line. It would be cool, but we would lose all the fun that we put in, the custimuzation. Hence ending our way of building. And the other problem is the Book Movie difference. Who would they follow? Movie's good, but the missed some good parts. Also the csatle line lets us access the pieces we need, but still allow us to decide, book or movie. We still have control.
LOTR would be cool, but the fun would go away, if TLC took over.

Good point about the standards of 8 years ago being different from the standards of today. In previous years the SW figs carried megaphones since TLC insisted they wouldn't make guns (ignoring, of course, the fact that they'd already had six-shooters and rifles in the Wild West theme and muskets and pistols in the Pirates theme). The lack of realistic SW weapons was a big impetus behind the Little Armory, which (if I have my history right) led to Brick Forge and BrickArms. Perhaps it was the popularity of these fan efforts, or maybe more likely driven by the desires of theme licensees, now we not only have "realistic" SW weapons, but also real machine guns in the Batman theme. So there has definitely been a change in the view of violence.

The movies vs book question is also a good one. The Spider-Man theme, for instance, was completely tied to the movies. Batman, however, is (in my understanding) more global, covering the comics, movies, cartoons etc. The SW license was originally strictly about the 6 movies. Now we get TIE Crawlers, baby Hutts, figs I've never heard of etc from the various cartoons, books, video games etc. Anyway, it seems that there is now more of a recognition of broader theme licenses, at least in these two cases. So while a theme could be linked to the movies, there could be latitude to include other things from the book.

Of course, it's now 4+ years since the last movie hit the theaters, so I can't see why the movie studio would be making licenses any more. OTOH, we're still seeing new SW toys decades after the first movie came out, so what do I know?

I think the most important point, though, is Black Ranger's. Official themes kill the fun of coming up with your own stuff. IMO the only point of themes is to provide us with recognizable figs and new elements we wouldn't have otherwise. Yes, some people are master customizers, but I wouldn't have a Darth Vader, or Spidey, etc, without official licenses. Since we are getting elves, dwarves, orcs, wizards etc through the current lines, we're already set. It's not like I'm really crying out to have a fig that looks like Elijah Woods. Heck, my mental image is probably more shaped by the Bakshi and Rankin-Bass cartoons, since I saw those around the time that I first read the books. So, yes, in my mind Boromir looks like a Viking and Frodo has a horrible bowl-cut.

Bruce and QB22 are right. The current line gives use all we need to make LOTR MOCs and figs, based on our own interpretations. Not to mention any other fantasy title out there (The odd Dragonlance or Narnia fig/MOC comes down the pike now and again). I remember NWBC in 2006 when I took my Helm's Deep. It was book-inspired, not the Peter Jackson movie version. Now while I have no ill will toward the movie version (other than it's not consistent with the book's desciption, nah that's for another post) it has implanted a "definitive version" in the minds of casual fans. I recall a father and son telling me that my Fellowship figs were "wrong," because they didn't look like the movie's versions! I don't want to have an "official" Frodo (et al) hung around my neck.

The violence factor was much more important 10 years ago when they decided on the license. Now they have discovered that their is tremendous demand for "violent" elements; be it guns, and themes or licenses. TLC was out-competed by it's competitors offering military, Agents, Aliens and the like--all with modern guns. I believe financial pressures played a role, however small it may have been, or that they will publicly acknowledge.

PS I have been very interested in Tolkien stuff lately. Besides Helm's Deep I built a verison of Smaug's Chamber (complete with Thorin and Co. and their Professional Treasure Hunter), and I am working on some custrom figs right now.

Men who lie, merely hide the truth; but men who tell half-lies, have forgotten where they put it--Samuel Clemens